do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-152/16: Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — Megasol Energie v Commission (Action for annulment — Dumping — Subsidies — Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) consigned from Malaysia and Taiwan — Extension to those imports of the definitive anti-dumping duty and definitive countervailing duty imposed on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) originating in or consigned from China — No interest in bringing proceedings — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, Malaysia, Taiwan, anti-dumping duty, countervailing charge, import (EU), photovoltaic cell








C_2017269EN.01001701.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/17





Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — Megasol Energie v Commission
(Case T-152/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - Dumping - Subsidies - Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) consigned from Malaysia and Taiwan - Extension to those imports of the definitive anti-dumping duty and definitive countervailing duty imposed on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) originating in or consigned from China - No interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility))
(2017/C 269/23)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Megasol Energie AG (Wangen an der Aare, Switzerland) (represented by: T. Wegner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche, A. Demeneix and K. Blanck-Putz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/184 of 11 February 2016 extending the definitive countervailing duty imposed by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2013 on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China to imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) consigned from Malaysia and Taiwan, whether declared as originating in Malaysia and in Taiwan or not (OJ 2016 L 37, p. 56), and of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/185 of 11 February 2016 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EU) No 1238/2013 on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China to imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) consigned from Malaysia and Taiwan, whether declared as originating in Malaysia and in Taiwan or not (OJ 2016 L 37, p. 76), in so far as they apply to the applicant.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Megasol Energie AG shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1222 of 26 June 2017 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Kiełbasa biała parzona wielkopolska (PGI)]
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Greater Poland province, Kuyavia-Pomerania province, Lubus province, Poland, designation of origin, labelling, meat product, product designation








L_2017174EN.01001301.xml










7.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 174/13








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2017/1222
of 26 June 2017
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Kiełbasa biała parzona wielkopolska (PGI)]


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Poland's application to register the name ‘Kiełbasa biała parzona wielkopolska’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Kiełbasa biała parzona wielkopolska’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Kiełbasa biała parzona wielkopolska’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.2. — Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, etc.), as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 June 2017.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 73, 9.3.2017, p. 25.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
Case T-713/16: Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — Fair deal for expats and Others v Commission
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU situation, European Commissioner, European Union membership, European official, United Kingdom, equal treatment, free movement of persons, freedom of expression, fundamental rights, legal expenses








C_2017269EN.01003501.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/35





Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — Fair deal for expats and Others v Commission
(Case T-713/16) (1)

(2017/C 269/47)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 428, 21.11.2016.
Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2017/1143 of 26 June 2017 appointing a member, proposed by the French Republic, of the European Economic and Social Committee
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Economic and Social Committee, France, appointment of members








L_2017165EN.01003601.xml










28.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 165/36








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU, Euratom) 2017/1143
of 26 June 2017
         
appointing a member, proposed by the French Republic, of the European Economic and Social Committee


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 302 thereof,


Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the French Government,


Having regard to the opinion of the European Commission,

Whereas:







(1)


On 18 September 2015 and 1 October 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU, Euratom) 2015/1600 (1) and (EU, Euratom) 2015/1790 (2) appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020.












(2)


A member's seat on the European Economic and Social Committee has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Michel DUBROMEL,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Mr Arnaud SCHWARTZ, Secrétaire national de France Nature environnement, is hereby appointed as a member of the European Economic and Social Committee for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 20 September 2020.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Luxembourg, 26 June 2017.


For the Council


The President

J. MIZZI
            





(1)  Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/1600 of 18 September 2015 appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020 (OJ L 248, 24.9.2015, p. 53).

(2)  Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/1790 of 1 October 2015 appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2015 to 20 September 2020 (OJ L 260, 7.10.2015, p. 23).
Political and Security Committee Decision (CFSP) 2017/1175 of 26 June 2017 on the acceptance of a third State's contribution to the European Union CSDP Military Training Mission in the Central African Republic (EUTM RCA) (EUTM RCA/3/2017)
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: Political and Security Committee
Subjects: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, EU military mission, financial aid, military cooperation, military training




L_2017170EN.01009301.xml










1.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 170/93








            POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION (CFSP) 2017/1175
of 26 June 2017
         
on the acceptance of a third State's contribution to the European Union CSDP Military Training Mission in the Central African Republic (EUTM RCA) (EUTM RCA/3/2017)


THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular the third paragraph of Article 38 thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/610 of 19 April 2016 on a European Union CSDP Military Training Mission in the Central African Republic (EUTM RCA) (1),

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 8(2) of Decision (CFSP) 2016/610, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee (PSC) to take the relevant decisions on acceptance of the proposed contributions by third States to EUTM RCA.












(2)


Following the recommendations regarding a contribution from Bosnia and Herzegovina by the EU Mission Commander and by the European Union Military Committee, the contribution from Bosnia and Herzegovina should be accepted and considered to be significant.












(3)


In accordance with Article 5 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and the implementation of decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications. Consequently, Denmark is not participating in the adoption of this Decision and is neither bound by it nor subject to its application,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1

1.   The contribution from Bosnia and Herzegovina to the European Union CSDP Military Training Mission in the Central African Republic (EUTM RCA) is accepted and is considered to be significant.


2.   Bosnia and Herzegovina is exempted from financial contributions to the budget of EUTM RCA.



Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 26 June 2017.


For the Political and Security Committee


The Chairperson

W. STEVENS
            





(1)  
            OJ L 104, 20.4.2016, p. 21.
Case T-182/16: Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — L'Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot (MASTER DUO) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark MASTER DUO — Prior national figurative mark MASTERS COLORS PARIS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Action manifestly unfounded in law — Article 126 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017269EN.01001902.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/19





Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — L'Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot (MASTER DUO)
(Case T-182/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark MASTER DUO - Prior national figurative mark MASTERS COLORS PARIS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action manifestly unfounded in law - Article 126 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2017/C 269/27)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: L'Oréal (Paris, France) (represented by: T. de Haan and P. Péters, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Guinot (Paris) (represented by: A. Sion, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 February 2016 (Case R 2916/2014-5) concerning opposition proceedings between Guinot and L’Oréal.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


L’Oréal shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 222, 20.6.2016.
Case T-180/16: Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — L'Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot (MASTER SHAPE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark MASTER SHAPE — Prior national figurative mark MASTERS COLORS PARIS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Action manifestly unfounded in law — Article 126 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017269EN.01001801.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/18





Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — L'Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot (MASTER SHAPE)
(Case T-180/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark MASTER SHAPE - Prior national figurative mark MASTERS COLORS PARIS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action manifestly unfounded in law - Article 126 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2017/C 269/25)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: L'Oréal (Paris, France) (represented by: T. de Haan and P. Péters, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Guinot (Paris) (represented by: A. Sion, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 February 2016 (Case R 2907/2014-5) concerning opposition proceedings between Guinot and L’Oréal.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


L’Oréal shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 222, 20.6.2016.
Case C-383/17: Action brought on 26 June 2017 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative check, infringement procedure (EU), maritime safety, national implementing measure, supervisory body, technical regulations, transport regulations, vessel








C_2017277EN.01002801.xml










21.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 277/28





Action brought on 26 June 2017 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-383/17)
(2017/C 277/41)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P. Costa de Oliveira and L. Nicolae, Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that by failing to provide the Commission with any report of the results of the monitoring of every recognised organisation acting on its behalf, the Portuguese Republic fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 9(2) of Directive 2009/15/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations;










—


order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 9(2) of the Directive clearly lays down that each Member State must, at least on a biennial basis, monitor every recognised organisation acting on its behalf and provide the other Member States and the Commission with a report on the results of such monitoring activities at the latest by 31 March of the year following the year in which the monitoring was carried out.
Since the time limit for transposing the Directive into national law expired on 17 June 2011 in accordance with Article 13(1) of that directive, the Portuguese Republic ought to have provided the first report by 31 March 2013 at the latest, as it could have opted to carry out the first monitoring during 2011 or 2012.
It is now June 2017 and the Portuguese Republic has still not provided a report.


(1)  OJ 2009 L 131, p. 47.
Case C-382/17: Action brought on 26 June 2017 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: environmental protection, international standard, law of the sea, maritime safety, quality standard, ship's flag








C_2017277EN.01002702.xml










21.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 277/27





Action brought on 26 June 2017 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-382/17)
(2017/C 277/40)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P. Costa de Oliveira and L. Nicolae, Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that by failing to develop, implement and maintain a quality management system for the operational parts of the flag-State-related activities of its administration, certified in accordance with the applicable international quality standards, by 17 June 2012, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8(1) of Directive 2009/21/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on compliance with flag State requirements;










—


order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 8(1) of the Directive clearly lays down that by 17 June 2012 the Member States must develop, implement and maintain the quality management system referred to.
It is now June 2017 and the Portuguese Republic has still not complied with Article 8(1).
By acting in that manner, the Portuguese administration is undermining the objectives pursued by the Directive, jeopardising maritime safety and the protection of the environment. In addition, the conduct of the Portuguese administration carries the risk of creating an unfair competitive advantage for the Portuguese fleet in relation to other Member States’ fleets.


(1)  OJ 2009 L 131, p. 132.
Case C-379/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 26 June 2017 — Società Immobiliare Al Bosco srl
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: enforcement of ruling, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, mutual recognition principle








C_2017318EN.01000601.xml










25.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/6





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 26 June 2017 — Società Immobiliare Al Bosco srl
(Case C-379/17)
(2017/C 318/09)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Società Immobiliare Al Bosco srl

Question referred

Is it compatible with Article 38(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (1) to apply a time limit which is laid down in the law of the State in which enforcement is sought, and on the basis of which an instrument may no longer be enforced after the expiry of a particular period, also to a functionally comparable instrument issued in another Member State and recognised and declared enforceable in the State in which enforcement is sought?


(1)  OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.
Case T-183/16: Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — L'Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot (MASTER DRAMA) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark MASTER DRAMA — Prior national figurative mark MASTERS COLORS PARIS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Action manifestly unfounded in law — Article 126 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017269EN.01002001.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/20





Order of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — L'Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot (MASTER DRAMA)
(Case T-183/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark MASTER DRAMA - Prior national figurative mark MASTERS COLORS PARIS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action manifestly unfounded in law - Article 126 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2017/C 269/28)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: L'Oréal (Paris, France) (represented by: T. de Haan and P. Péters, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Guinot (Paris) (represented by: A. Sion, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 February 2016 (Case R 2500/2014-5) concerning opposition proceedings between Guinot and L’Oréal.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


L’Oréal shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 222, 20.6.2016.
Case T-26/17 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — Jalkh v Parliament (Interim measures — Law governing the institutions — Member of the European Parliament — Privileges and immunities — Waiver of the parliamentary immunity of a Member of the European Parliament — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — No urgency)
Date: 2017-06-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, Member of the European Parliament, judicial investigation, organic law, parliamentary immunity








C_2017269EN.01002401.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/24





Order of the President of the General Court of 26 June 2017 — Jalkh v Parliament
(Case T-26/17 R)
((Interim measures - Law governing the institutions - Member of the European Parliament - Privileges and immunities - Waiver of the parliamentary immunity of a Member of the European Parliament - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency))
(2017/C 269/35)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Jean-François Jalkh (Gretz-Armainvillers, France) (represented initially by J.-P. Le Moigne and subsequently by M. Ceccaldi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Dean and S. Alonso de León, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Articles 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU, seeking suspension of the operation decision of 22 November 2016 taken by the European Parliament to waive Mr Jalkh’s parliamentary immunity in view of the judicial investigation (No 1422400530) brought before the Paris Tribunal de Grande Instance (ordinary court of first instance, France).

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.